# Re: toplevel namespace justification

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-toplevel-namespace-justification/102487>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [November 15, 2005, 11:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-toplevel-namespace-justification/102487 "2005-11-15T23:50:33Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Stephen.L.Molitor](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@Stephen.L.Molitor](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Stephen.L.Molitor)\
**Post date:** [November 15, 2005, 11:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-toplevel-namespace-justification/102487/1 "2005-11-15T23:50:33Z")

</div>

> So what about the alternate possibility of “requiring into”  
> an arbitrary namespace?

Related to that, will 1.9 / 2.0 have the ability to extend or modify  
core classes but only within one’s own ‘namespace’ (however ‘namespace’  
is defined - a module, or some new construct)?

Steve